Compare two different foods side-by-side by nutrients, energy, and quality scores.
The CSV contains energy and nutrients per 100 g for these two records only. Missing measurements remain blank rather than zero. Model scores and personal health conclusions are not exported.
Share your experiences or ask your questions.
Energy
59 kcal
Score
17 / 100
Akça armut has a higher nutrition quality score (19) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
57 vs 59(+3.5%)
Score Diff
19 vs 17(-10.5%)
OVERALL WINNER
Akça armut
Higher energy
Starking elması
Score leader
Akça armut
Nutrient split
12 - 6 (tie: 2)
This chart shows energy per 100 g for both foods.
Each axis is normalized to 0-100; the outer shape indicates relative dominance on that nutrient.
Green/blue bars indicate first food advantage, orange bars indicate second food advantage.
Akça armut and Starking elması are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Akça armut has 57.0 kcal and Starking elması has 59.0 kcal. The difference is 2.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 19 and 17. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
20 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Akça armut | Starking elması | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | — | 3 µg | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.012 mg | 0.017 mg | +41.7% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.026 mg | 0.026 mg | 0.0% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.029 mg | 0.041 mg | +41.4% |
| Beta Karoten | — | 27 µg | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 4.3 mg | 4.6 mg | +7.0% |
| Demir | 0.18 mg | 0.12 mg | -33.3% |
| Diyet lifi | 3.1 g | 2.4 g | -22.6% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | — | 0.18 mg | — |
| Folat DFE | 7 µg | 3 µg | -57.1% |
| Fosfor | 12 mg | 11 mg | -8.3% |
| Fruktoz | 6.22 g | — | — |
| Glikoz | 2.76 g | — | — |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | 4.4 µg | 2.2 µg | -50.0% |
| Kalsiyum | 9 mg | 6 mg | -33.3% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 15.2 g | 13.81 g | -9.1% |
| Magnezyum | 7 mg | 5 mg | -28.6% |
| Niasin | 0.161 mg | 0.091 mg | -43.5% |
| Potasyum | 116 mg | 107 mg | -7.8% |
| Protein | 0.36 g | 0.26 g | -27.8% |
| Sakkaroz | 0.77 g | — | — |
| Sodyum | 1 mg | 1 mg | 0.0% |
| Su | 83.8 g | 85.56 g | +2.1% |
| Toplam yağ | 0.14 g | 0.17 g | +21.4% |
| Toplam Şeker | 9.75 g | 10.39 g | +6.6% |
| Çinko | 0.1 mg | 0.04 mg | -60.0% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Akça armut and Starking elması.
Akça armut has less energy per 100 g (57 kcal versus 59 kcal).
For measured Çinko, Akça armut has 0.1 mg and Starking elması has 0.04 mg per 100 g. The table shows other nutrients separately.
The score summarizes this site's nutrient model. It does not establish that one food is healthier or suitable for everyone. Scores: Akça armut 19, Starking elması 17.
Energy and nutrient values in the table are per 100 g. Actual intake changes with serving size.
Data Sources
Records may come from different sources. Check each food page for source and preparation details; do not treat missing measurements as zero.
Analytical Methodology
The scoring algorithm is a scale of 100 based on nutrient density and macro/micro component balance.